SEXISM! What's with the standards?

[DevilWithaHalo]

Not going to happen? Germany is installing women quotas in corporate upper management. What are you, republican?

I said social and financial disparities. Neither of which are gender regulated; which you continue to be confused by. This policy (if true), is gender discriminatory; nothing more. You can?t correct sexist behavior by using sexist policy.

Well, I don't care about the other morons. Your interlocutor isn't.

Morons? Good thing to know how you feel about those with differing opinions.

No, I do not. Because "currently" is misleading, and implies that such conditions change on a whim, when they are manifestly slow, gradual, sometimes painful processes. Plain English: men have had a virtual monopoly on economic and financial power in Western societies for the past, oh, 3,000 years - establishing and maintaining male-centered power structures - so the cards are obviously stacked in their favour.

*Favor

That?s what I suspected. Considering your 3k year statement, I?d question what you feel a Western society is.

We are talking about the workplace. In THAT context, women have had zero advantages since the beginning of Western society. Hell, them being allowed to work outside their house/field is a relatively recent phenomenon. Because the status quo didn't think they could do anything more than cooking and cleaning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchal_society I know, it?s another Wiki link, but the internet seems to like them. I think you?re still arguing from the context of the current Western societies inaccurate stereotypes. You?ll probably argue that as the link states; there haven?t been any obvious matriarchies in history, but then you might realize that the definitions behind Patriarchies are drastically different to support a wide variety of cultures.

And you do realize that both cooking and cleaning have become multi-billion dollar industries right?

You don't get to make blatant mistakes in your post, then accuse others of "cherry picking" once they point them out. I doubt that you know what an academic discussion is.

A blatant mistake? Societies *are* driven primary by traditional and cultural identities. Your continued Ad Hominem?s are becoming tiring. Academic discussions at least attempt to avoid back handed comments, logical fallacies and the general piss poor attitude you represent.

Bullshit. We have established that gender isn't the core issue; what I am arguing is that in the current status quo, one gender finds itself, for a multitude of factors, at a disadvantage. Your entire point is centered around the status quo being basically incidental, that things COULD be different given a different set of a prioris; that's a nice thought in a theoretical universe, but the empirical reality, in our societies, is that white men run shit.

*Priories

If you really thought that was my point then you didn?t comprehend it correctly. The empirical reality we live in, is that *money* runs shit. Those with cash can dominant society in different fashions. A ?white man? does not currently hold the presidency. A ?white man? does not currently hold the position of world?s richest person (Carlos Slim, Mexico). Sure, you?ll snap back that they?re men. Then I?ll politely point out the richest women in the world (you can view that in Forbes if you like) didn?t let the status quo stop them. Then you?ll probably still point out the majority is still controlled by men. Yep? I can see how productive this conversation will be if I continue it.

Also, wow, without even looking at that list, we really were influenced a lot by those Mongols, weren't we? Drinking mare's milk at the bar and stuff? And yet, everybody in the political and business worlds dress, speak, and act white. Surely the concept of hegemony isn't new to you.

Wow, way to ignore the fact Genghis Khan pretty much reshaped the entire Asian continent with the great land conquest in all of history. I can see where this is going. Because the Western culture advanced the fastest, we are to blame for having the most influence in politics and business; right? Even though most economists will argue that China is quickly becoming the economic power. But egad, it?s still controlled by men! Something must be done!

Yes, it's coincidence that the vast majority of G-20 and FTSE/NYSE blue-chip company leaders happen to be white men. Come on now. Theory against empirism. One tenth of corporate board members in this world are women; not because they are women, but because, again, they arrived late to the party we call capitalism. And they were late because their husbands wouldn't let them out of the house.

*Empiricism

Right, I?m sure there was a vast conspiracy perpetrated by men that required women wear chains that kept them in the kitchen. I know I never let my girlfriends out of the house; they existed solely to serve my male needs and patriarchic desires! I would have tried something less sarcastic here; but you?re not listening to me anyway. You?d probably suggest that we fire some of these corporate tycoons and replace them with women because that?s the only way to insure gender balance.

Funny. So let me get your equivalency here - women aren't physically strong enough to participate in a sport filled up with 'roid-raging men, so they can't have equal representation in finance or poltics because...?

*Politics.

The NFL actually prohibits the use of steroids and does not promote violence against anyone.

Once again you missed the point entirely. Let me try to talk really slowly here? there is no legislation, regulation or socially sanctioned *anything*, preventing women from achieving anything they truly want to in our modern, western society. The only *real* issue we face today, are individuals stuck in a mindset that perpetuates stereotypes which influence the perceptions of others. Or in other words?

Ooooh, so it WAS sexism all along...

?commentary like this. I?d point out exactly how you?re detracting from the discussion by using your current tactics, but I feel my time is better spent elsewhere. Now since you?ll no doubt snap back some absurdly fallacious rhetoric, let me go ahead and just roll with it? I have to go create some policies that subjugate the free spirit of feminism everywhere, because I?m a white guy, and that?s what we do!

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

Oh sir, you make me laugh so.

*King's English. The fucking arrogance of an American to correct proper English, the one bit of culture that they had, and promptly proceeded to rape.

America is the cultural melting pot of the world. But if you want to continue to assert the Monarchy as the ?proper? law of language, you go ahead and bow to the crown. I must admit I?m laughing at your position that the King?s English, although derived from previous languages, is the ?proper? one; way to support the status quo! (Snicker)

*Wrong. I am not talking about Dominican monks. I am talking about the plural of "a priori".

Ah, in that case it is priori. Some words don?t require ?S? on the end of them to pluralize them. I?m sure you already knew that though.

Yes. And when you go to a business meeting today, even in Ulanbataar, you dress and act like a 12th century Mongol. Oh, wait, you don't. You dress in a suit and tie, and use English terms.

Because we should dress and act like a 12th century Mongol when in a modern western business meeting? Did you know that Japanese business etiquette has its own unique forms of conduct and behavior? But we white men are still forcing them to wear suits! Ha!

Also, not blame. Recognise, even though that influence was paid for in blood. But then, to you, cultural imperialism probably died when the last African country declared independence.

In the sense that you find fault with the western influence homogenizing the entirety of the worlds it?s supposedly conquered, you are indeed blaming it. I was going to make a snide comment regarding a Englishman giving an American a hard time about cultural imperialism, but I don?t think any nation has the monopoly on that.

Honest mistake.

Meh, I was being spiteful?

*Blow up dolls. Or prostitutes.

?and you could probably see why. I think this is actually more insulting to them than it is to me. Prostitutes are hard working people; how else are we villainous white guys suppose to get our jollies? We control all the cash, so it?s a natural relationship that develops because we insure they have no other option. Well, they could strip, but that?s not nearly as glamorous as being a porn star. Good thing I didn?t mention farms, you?d probably accuse me of fucking sheep.

Right. I am the one responsible for only 90 women serving in Congress, or 90% of all corporate board members being male. Not attitudes like "we have declared equality, so it's your own fault if you're not succeeding."

There are actually 78 female members of the 112th Congress. Most statistics also place female board membership at around 12-16% depending.

Equality was declared and is currently protected by legislation. What you?re suggesting is that the men should have vacated their positions to insure equal representation. You seem to be under the misguided opinion that that is the only way to insure true equality.

The only thing that is preventing women from obtaining these ?coveted? positions is either they are currently filled, and/or they are not as qualified as another person for them. But sure, please do suggest that a position should be given to a female over a male regardless of qualifications because it?s the ?right? thing to do. Because as any hard working young person has had to face when entering the business world; you have to work your way up to gain the experience and skills necessary for upper management.

You're a republican, aren't you.

And because I eat meat I support animal cruelty right? Grow up buddy. 24 of the current female members of Congress are registered republicans, and 5 female republicans in the Senate. Apparently they didn?t let your negative attitude toward them stop them from obtaining positions of authority in the US government. Because if you were responsible for it, there would be at least 29 less women serving right now. Funny how that works.